asked on Memory is running slower than advertised.
I just built a new computer. All is running great. However, my memory doesn't seem to be running optimally. I have enabled the XMP profile in the bios and it says it's running at 2666MHz which is the advertised clock speed. However, when i run the benchmark it states that is performing way worse than expected.
It's corsair vengeance 2666 LPX
It's corsair vengeance 2666 LPX
Windows 10Hardware
Last Comment
Joe
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
THIS SOLUTION ONLY AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS.
View this solution by signing up for a free trial.
Members can start a 7-Day free trial and enjoy unlimited access to the platform.
ASKER
Userbenchmark. I really don't know a lot about benchmarking.
Well, some memory do perform "way worse than expected". But keep in mind, even if the memory is performing this "badly", you probably will never notice the difference with a few memory sticks that's been proven to "perform as advertised". That's because the memory speed is so fast, it was never the bottleneck of a PC system.
If you were able to clone the PC (I know, it's a fantasy hypothesis), so 2 identical PC's next to each other, and 2 clones of you, with one PC having swapped the memory for a "better" one, and you would do ALL THE THINGS you normally do (open Word, read some webpages, play Youtube video), at the end of the day, BOTH your clones would probably finish EXACTLY at the same time (give or take a few milliseconds).
Now, if you are very specific, and need it for a special memory intensive math problem, sure, maybe you'll get some differences. But for real world, normal use, negligible.
If you were able to clone the PC (I know, it's a fantasy hypothesis), so 2 identical PC's next to each other, and 2 clones of you, with one PC having swapped the memory for a "better" one, and you would do ALL THE THINGS you normally do (open Word, read some webpages, play Youtube video), at the end of the day, BOTH your clones would probably finish EXACTLY at the same time (give or take a few milliseconds).
Now, if you are very specific, and need it for a special memory intensive math problem, sure, maybe you'll get some differences. But for real world, normal use, negligible.
How worse is "way worse"? If you're talking 1-200 MHz, I wouldn't bother worrying about it too much. While that seems like a lot, as Kimputer stated in the grand scheme of things you wouldn't even notice a difference if it had that extra 200MHz. Download this tool:
https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html
And tell me what your reported RAM speed is using this interface. Is it 2333MHz as advertised? If so, then it's possible the Benchmark is off by a small margin due to other factors.
https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html
And tell me what your reported RAM speed is using this interface. Is it 2333MHz as advertised? If so, then it's possible the Benchmark is off by a small margin due to other factors.
ASKER
So apparently user benchmark is inaccurate. I used Sandra sisoft, however you spell it. Everything is running as it should.
I put a lot of time and money into this build so I wanted to make sure it was right.
I put a lot of time and money into this build so I wanted to make sure it was right.